EXTREME PORN BILL

[one eyed jack]

I wouldn't worry too much Benson Media..As long as you dont make videos with heated knives going up the bum or forks being jabbed in your slaves eyes or anything too loopy i wouldnt worry. Im sure there will be girls wild enough out there to want to do that...I wont mention a certain person who pulled a knife out on his missus mid scene (LOL) man that had me breaking out into a cold sweat.

The bill has specifically quoted: "corpse fucking" (yeah I thought that was a joke too) but I dont kow anyone who has cornered the niche in necrophilia porn yet or much still if there would be that much demand for it anyway.



Erratum: My apologies, it was changed from an earlier paper to the more acceptable term of "an act involving the interference of a human corpse"

Could you imagine such topics being discussed in the Houses of Parliament and them spluttering over the gin and tonics...

"By Jiminy. Steady on man. Really"

[JB]

I'm not saying there isn't a place for your services: I agree 100% that if UK producers are involved in BDSM and other stuff that won't get an R18 in the UK, they should be operating from somewhere like Amsterdam.

I'm just saying that the new law targets the customer, so it doesn't matter where the content is produced. People buying your content in the UK need to be aware that, in theory, they can be prosecuted for possessing it. I don't agree with this situation, just telling it how it is.

As you say, both the UK and US are very hung up on censorship. That's the reality of life, and it's something that the UK porn industry has to work with, whether we like it or not.

Benson_Media wrote:

> Two of my publishers were prosecuted way back in the early
> nineties for possession and publication of my artwork so I
> fully understand the draconian nature of the UK's obscenity
> laws.

[videokim]

The police monitor & know of most of us long term producers & its only when the our films are very extreme that they will act at some time. Normal suck & fuck which most of us make usually flies through the censors uncut so they are no problem to anyone. We have helped the police a couple of times when weve been asked for under aged material e.g. 16 & below, & in helping them break up pedo rings they were helpful in advising us on what to & what not to make.
Police will get scapegoats in producers & customers but only those making or watching sick porn rather than sexy porn which is a big difference.

John

P.S. being brought up in West Ham i had quite a few runnings with the police so i am no grass but children are a different matter.

[one eyed jack]

If I was producing such things I would see this as an excuse to raise the premium on such product...I bet those producers are revelling in this new law and the ones here will be forced more underground which means more money for them.

I'd like to remind people that extreme porn that may look abusive is not short of models who like to do something outside of the ordinary. I know of girls who crave it.

Thing is it must have come to a point for this new bill to be introduced. It just didnt come out of nowhere.

I cant see many hard boiled extreme producers being put off by this and nor can I see a drop in those who seek it. if anything it wil be like the old days when people sought out that special tape ad were willing to pay for it..It will be best not to torrent it either because how do you know they wont get your IP address and monitor you...

How do you know they wont make it available to entrap you???

[JB]

one eyed jack wrote:

> Thing is it must have come to a point for this new bill to be
> introduced. It just didnt come out of nowhere.

I think it did, more or less. There's been less extreme porn around these days, compared to 10 years ago. But there's been a conservative shift in society and politics for the past few years and this law was just one symptom. Look at all the tossers complaining to Ofcom every time someone swears on BBC... unfortunately the Daily Mail brigade have got stronger and pointless laws are the natural result of that.

[colonel]

It came from the campaigning of Mrs. Longhurst, whose daughter was murdered by a perv fascinated by extreme porn. You remember the case- the bastard kept her daughter's corpse in a wheelie bin for a few weeks.

A few points here. Out of her grief, the lady has campaigned to have the baby thrown out with the bathwater- the porn the scum murderer watched was far beyond anything any of us would agree to perform or to watch [I think!] .

I also think that either no prosecutions would be brought or no jury would convict any of the producers on here.

Mrs.Longhurst isn't Mary Whitehouse- she really has suffered. Scummie murderer should get life without parole- 23 hours a day locked up in solitary.

[andy at handiwork]

JB wrote:

... unfortunately the Daily Mail brigade have got stronger and pointless laws are the natural result of that.


There is an irony in that Jerry, in as much as the Mail is the paper that campaigns against the 'nanny state', and was probably one of the first to attack the use of anti-terrorist spying measures by local councils to catch middle-class parents fibbing about where they live to get the kids into a better school, and the so-called wheelie-bin martyrs. I would have thought that the privacy invading/interfering provisions of this legislation would make it a perfect target for the Mail. Sigh.

[JB]

andy at handiwork wrote:

> There is an irony in that Jerry, in as much as the Mail is the
> paper that campaigns against the 'nanny state'

Yeah - except when it comes to porn, sex, swearing, drugs, alcohol...

[JB]

colonel wrote:

> Mrs.Longhurst isn't Mary Whitehouse- she really has suffered.

I'm not blaming the poor woman. She didn't get the law passed by herself - it was a dishonest media campaign combined with a frightened public and cynical politicians that got this law passed. She was just a pawn in the game.

[Benson_Media]

Hi Guys

I really appreciate all these intelligent comments and I'm glad I've sparked a worthwhile debate albeit unintentionally.

In reply to:

"I'm just saying that the new law targets the customer, so it doesn't matter where the content is produced. People buying your content in the UK need to be aware that, in theory, they can be prosecuted for possessing it.."

We educate our customers about this and allow them to choose DVD's without covers and labels. A few orders disappear (confiscated) but we re-send free of charge.

"Police will get scapegoats in producers & customers but only those making or watching sick porn rather than sexy porn which is a big difference."

This is correct. The police only need to come down hard on one company to control the reast with fear. But the real danger concerns what we decide is 'sick' porn.
Kim, I'm sure Daily Mail readers would find your productions 'sick' and I will willingly swear on the bible that my products are 'sick', I take great care in making them so.
So we'd both be in jail..but quite clearly my product is more extreme than yours.

But at the risk of sounding mundane. I repeat, if there are any producers out there that do want to exercise prudence and talk with us about DVD publication and distribution please get back to us.

From the companies we've talked to so far there are a lot of producers out their shooting straight to web and not realising any revenue from DVD sales or streaming sales. In a recession everything counts!

That's it..carry on, advertisement over. 'The Extreme Porn Bill Debate is brought to you by Benson Media in association with The British Girls Adult Film Database..